“Unity” and Its Counterfeit: The Suppression of the Latin Mass in Monterey

On 14 September 2025, Bishop Daniel Garcia of Monterey announced that the Traditional Latin Mass at Sacred Heart, Hollister, would cease on 13 October. In his letter to the faithful, he cited Traditionis Custodes and the accompanying papal letter of 2021, invoking “unity” and declaring that the postconciliar liturgy is the “one expression” of the Roman Rite. He urged the faithful to “join in unity … as they gather around the table of the Lord.”¹ With this decision, the only diocesan celebration of the TLM in Monterey has been eliminated.

This act—timed just weeks before Bishop Garcia’s transfer to Austin—illustrates not a pastoral solicitude for souls, but the juridical deployment of papal legislation to extinguish a living Catholic tradition. The irony is not lost: families who were formed by the Mass of the saints are told that “unity” now requires their eviction from the very liturgy that nourished their faith.

Canonical rights of the faithful
The 1983 Code of Canon Law recognises that “the Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescriptions of their own rite approved by the lawful pastors of the Church”² and that “sacred ministers cannot deny the sacraments to those who seek them opportunely … and who are not prohibited by law from receiving them.”³ These rights are not easily abrogated. The Roman Rite as codified in 1570 and continued until 1962 was never formally suppressed; indeed, Pope Benedict XVI declared unequivocally that “it was never abrogated and, in principle, was always permitted.”⁴

By refusing even to petition the Holy See for a continuation of the Mass in Hollister, Bishop Garcia has acted not to safeguard the faithful’s right, but to extinguish it. His invocation of “unity” is used to justify depriving Catholics of a legitimate and approved form of worship that the universal law of the Church still regards as lawful.

The authority of Quo Primum
The juridical and theological weight of Pope St Pius V’s Quo Primum (1570) cannot be overlooked. Issued in the wake of the Council of Trent, it promulgated the Roman Missal and granted perpetual use to priests of the Roman Rite. Pius V declared: “We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure.”⁵ While subsequent popes have introduced new editions of the Missal, defenders of the TLM argue that this perpetual concession was never revoked. Benedict XVI’s affirmation that the Missal was never abrogated confirms this.

The lex orandi and doctrinal continuity
Catholic tradition teaches that the lex orandi—the law of prayer—is the lex credendi, the law of belief. To suggest that the ancient Roman Rite may be forbidden, or that it undermines unity, risks creating a rupture between past and present belief. Benedict XVI reminded bishops that “what earlier generations held as sacred remains sacred and great for us too; it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.”⁶

Unity in the Church is not uniformity of liturgical expression. For centuries the Roman Church has embraced multiple rites and uses—the Ambrosian in Milan, the Mozarabic in Toledo, the Dominican and Carmelite uses, and many others. To claim that the postconciliar rite is now the “one expression” of the Roman Rite is not continuity but innovation.

The pastoral duty of bishops
The supreme law of the Church is the salvation of souls (salus animarum suprema lex).⁷ Where pastoral necessity exists, bishops are called to accommodate the faithful’s legitimate spiritual needs. The faithful of Hollister had for years gathered around the altar of the traditional Mass, forming their spiritual lives according to its rhythms. To deprive them of this nourishment is not a pastoral act but a juridical imposition.

Traditional canonists point to the provisions of canon law that recognise a state of necessity.⁸ When the hierarchy unjustly restricts access to the sacraments, priests and faithful may continue their observance for the sake of salvation. In this light, communities deprived of the TLM are justified in seeking it elsewhere, even outside diocesan structures, until true pastoral solicitude is restored.

Unity or exclusion?
The rhetoric of Bishop Garcia’s letter exemplifies a tragic inversion. Where Summorum Pontificum sought reconciliation and harmony, Traditionis Custodes has been applied to divide and exclude. The faithful of Hollister are told to abandon their liturgical patrimony in the name of “unity,” yet unity has historically been achieved precisely by allowing legitimate diversity under one faith and one authority. To expel Catholics from the Mass of Ages is to make “unity” a slogan that masks exclusion.

The suppression at Hollister therefore raises a deeper question: can a Church that forbids the very liturgy sanctified by the saints, hallowed by immemorial custom, and never abrogated by law, truly claim to be acting for the unity and salvation of souls? Or is it instead erecting barriers where Christ and His Church once offered continuity and peace?

---

¹ Bishop Daniel Garcia, Letter to the Faithful of Sacred Heart, Hollister, 14 September 2025, reported by Catholic News Agency.
² CIC 1983, can. 214.
³ CIC 1983, can. 843 §1.
⁴ Benedict XVI, Summorum Pontificum (2007), art. 1.
⁵ Pius V, Quo Primum (1570).
⁶ Benedict XVI, Letter to Bishops accompanying Summorum Pontificum (2007).
⁷ CIC 1983, can. 1752.
⁸ CIC 1983, can. 1323–1324.